In India, conducting surveys in cases involving absent petitioners and defendants during Family Dispute Resolution (FDR) is guided by legal provisions and precedents. When both the petitioner and defendant are absent during the survey, courts may resort to utilizing available records or testimonies from witnesses, often including village panchas (elders). Section 73 of the Indian Evidence Act empowers courts to consider secondary evidence in situations where primary evidence is not accessible or absent. This provision allows the court to proceed with the survey by relying on credible sources such as records and community testimonials in the absence of the involved parties.
Furthermore, in cases where land possession is disputed or enjoyed by someone other than the rightful owner, courts must conduct surveys aligned with the court decree determining the rightful ownership and possession. The survey should reflect the decree to establish the ground reality effectively.
Regarding the appointment of additional surveyors by a court-appointed adlr (Additional District Land Registrar), the adlr can delegate survey work to other surveyors to assist in executing the survey within the framework of the court's order and in accordance with applicable laws. This delegation should align with the court's directions, principles of natural justice, and statutory provisions to ensure a fair and accurate survey, even in the absence of parties involved, upholding the integrity of legal proceedings.
Relevant case laws such as Gurpreet Kaur v. Sucha Singh and R. Rajagopal Reddy v. Padmini Chandrasekharan support the use of secondary evidence and surveys aligned with court decrees to establish possession and ownership in such cases.